Courses / Communication / COM-FPX3700
Communication · Capella FlexPath

COM-FPX3700: Conflict Resolution

A FlexPath communication course examining conflict at the interpersonal and institutional level, closing with applied negotiation and resolution strategies for real leadership scenarios.

Get Help With COM-FPX3700 →

COM-FPX3700 moves FlexPath students from understanding interpersonal conflict through institutional/organizational conflict and into applied negotiation and resolution strategy. Each assessment widens the lens — from a single interpersonal relationship to a whole organization to a leadership-level negotiation scenario — while keeping the core skill consistent: identifying why conflict arose, distinguishing functional from dysfunctional conflict, and proposing resolution strategies grounded in communication theory. This guide breaks down what each assessment requires and how academic support for COM-FPX3700 fits into a course built on escalating conflict-analysis scope.

Course Overview

The course is structured in three stages of increasing scope. It opens with interpersonal conflict — analyzing communication behaviors that lead to conflict and how individual differences contribute to it. It then shifts to institutional conflict — examining why conflict arises within organizations and distinguishing functional conflict (which can improve outcomes) from dysfunctional conflict (which damages them). It closes with conflict negotiation and resolution — applying strategies and weighing possible outcomes for resolving conflict in leadership scenarios.

Key Assessments

How We Help With COM-FPX3700

Common Challenges in This Course

The most common point loss on Assessment 1 is describing a conflict scenario without explicitly analyzing the communication behaviors that caused it — the rubric grades the behavioral analysis, not just the conflict narrative. On Assessment 2, conflating functional and dysfunctional conflict, or failing to give the organization credit for conflict that actually improved decision-making, is a frequent gap. On the final negotiation assessment, presenting only one resolution outcome instead of weighing multiple possible outcomes (as most rubrics expect) is the most common shortfall.

Need Help With COM-FPX3700?

Send us your specific assessment instructions and rubric, and we'll match you with a specialist familiar with this exact course.

Related Courses

COM-FPX3700 FAQ

What's the difference between functional and dysfunctional conflict?

Functional conflict can surface useful perspectives and improve decisions, while dysfunctional conflict damages relationships and outcomes — Assessment 2 expects you to clearly distinguish the two with specific organizational evidence.

Does the interpersonal conflict scenario need to be a real personal experience?

Most rubrics accept either a real or realistic hypothetical scenario — what matters is enough specific detail to analyze the communication behaviors and individual differences involved.

Which resolution strategy should I recommend?

It depends on the conflict type analyzed — mediation often fits interpersonal disputes, while collaborative problem-solving or structural changes often fit institutional conflict; the rubric rewards matching the strategy to the specific conflict, not picking one strategy by default.

How many possible outcomes should the final negotiation assessment cover?

Most rubrics expect at least two or three plausible outcomes weighed against each other, not a single predetermined resolution.

Is this course more theory-based or scenario-based?

Both — each assessment expects you to apply conflict-resolution and communication theory directly to a specific scenario, rather than discussing theory in the abstract.